I checked into this further, rather than go by the above posted article.

The 'walk of shame' was a company policy at this Pasadena Target store. Target will stop this policy, although it is perfectly legal in California, as a deterrent to employee theft.

Of the three counts named in the lawsuit filed by the family, two will be thrown out instantly as not applicable to the Target Store, and only the third count is under consideration.Count 1: False Imprisonment (See note 1 below).Count 2: Negligence, (Had no supporting basis).Count 3: Infliction of Emotional Distress (Has a minor bearing for basis).

Note 1: On the suspects arrival at work, the POLICE grabbed him OUTSIDE the store, and emptied his pockets, a standard police procedure. This took place BEFORE Management or Security Guards were present on the scene.

Rather than take the suspect directly to the police station, they placed him under arrest, and Target Management suggested, considering the hearsay evidence against him, they give him a chance to clear himself first. They took the SHORTEST ROUTE from the store entrance to the managers office, which bypasses all the main aisles. They never traversed an aisle previously used for the 'walk of shame.'

After being questioned in the managers office, the Police felt his responses indicated he did steal from the store. The Police chose to take him to the Station for more in-depth questioning by a professional interrogator. The interrogator found no incriminating responses and suggested he be released.

The media hype about the 'walk of shame' is erroneous, typical sensationalized journalism. Yes, Target does have the 'walk of shame' where an employee who did steal from the company is paraded through the store.

The accusation of theft was made by a disgruntled employee who continually picked on this boy, both inside and outside the store, and while on or off duty. They brawled several times.The police are building a case against this other employee for false accusations.

Some emotional distress was involved in taking the boy from the front of the store to the office, but a far greater stress was imposed by the bully who picked on him continually, and started fights with him for no reason.

Which event caused his suicide? Being taken to an office in handcuffs, or being bullied by a fellow employee. Only the deceased knows!

Once again, I don't see Target Stores as having much to do with what transpired.

I also feel this topic has worn itself out. Until more is published or the outcome and a transcription of the court hearing is made available. I have nothing else to say.

Well said, brandtrn, the Target stores management acted disgustingly. Very unprofessional and just plain wrong. The "severe emotional distress" this guy suffered before his own death must have been horrific.

Talked to a solicitor/lawyer friend of mine and he says he's pretty certain Target will pay out. The management, therefore Target, must take responsibility. If they don't they'll look like monsters. Target is one of those huge corporations that has wanted to be seen as caring, they won't want to tarnish that image. He says he's 99.9% sure it'll settle out of court.